And moderator, there is in fact English dialect (although they don’t really call it as such), the Scottish speak and phrase their English differently to say the Australians, Americans and the Irish and wot not, however, you are correct in saying that written English has no dialect and the same rules of grammar apply globally when writing in the English language.

Chris: There is actually monetary benefit to leave the church of Sweden, as you can opt out of paying a church tax nowadays (annoyingly this only happened as late as the year 2000). The tax paid can also be allocated to the religion of the taxpayers choice. As far as there being a fine to leave is beyond me. Perhaps an administrative fee, but none that I know of.

p.s. i think it’s neither…..either would be used in a positive sense but since in this case it’s being used in a negative sense (coupled with “not”) we use neither. anyway excuse my English as sometimes I get mixed up with dialect. anyway, let me keep that nice old word – whatever – roaming my head haha

[Moderator – Chris, what you “think” about English grammar and syntax is irrelevant. Grammar and syntax are not a matter of haphazard guesswork or of what you “think”. There are rules. Listen to me carefully: ‘not’ is used with ‘either’ NOT with ‘neither’, as in ‘I am not going EITHER’. ‘Neither’ is used with NOR, as in: ‘Neither Chris nor Alfred is going there.’ You can use EITHER of them without ‘not’ or ‘nor’, as in: ‘You can choose either one of them’, or ‘Neither of us is interested in what you’re saying.’ English is not a dialect. It’s a language. A fine for leaving the Church of Sweden – where did you get that? In 1952 a law was passed that allowed a Swedish citizen to withdraw formally from the state church and not be a member of any church. Different religions were accepted in Sweden after the Edict of Toleration of 1781, even though the Church of Sweden continued as the state church, with the king as its highest authority, into the late 20th century. In the 1990s, the Swedish Parliament approved a series of reforms aimed at promoting religious freedom, and in January 2000 the church ceased being financially supported by the state. In addition, Lutheranism stopped being the country’s official religion.]

Nordic EU countries? Such as Sweden? Hummmmmm those had a state religion up to 8 years ago (the Church of Sweden). Denmark and Finland still have a state religion and so do non-EU Norway and Iceland. Your attempt at idolising the Nordics / Nordic countries fell flat too….

There was no such thing as “Malta” in 1565 neither….

[Moderator – Yes, there was. And it’s ‘either’ not ‘neither’. Sorry to be such a nitpicker, but you’re my bete-noir: a smartass who knows next to nothing. Whether a country has a state religion or not makes no difference to the price of eggs. It’s whether that country separates church and state and is wholly secular in its legislation that counts. I don’t think you can fault Sweden, Denmark and Finland on that.]

… and however ‘great’ the siege in 1565 might have been to the people of Malta – who have milked it for more than it was worth, it was no more than a blip in the history of the Ottoman Empire. Do people honestly believe that the Turks still have it in for us Maltese on this one?

[Moderator – That might be because all Maltese children are taught about the Great Siege but almost none of them are taught about the Ottoman Empire.]

Now, regarding the Ottoman Empire, I respect countries for what they are now, not for what they were 500 years ago. In any case, there was no such thing as “Turkey” in 1565.

Still, it’s true, Turks hate Malta – those who know about it, that is. As do North Africans, Sub-Saharan Africans, Arabs, Lebanese, most Europeans, Americans, you name it. We’re not exactly everyone’s favourite nation you know. Hell, even the Gozitans hate us.

You’re a gemgem party pooper :)

Apparently their school books deny defeat at the hands of the Knights and Maltese in the Great seige of 1565. So much so that in some grand palace in Istambul there is a big garden with pavilions named after vanquished countries, and belive it or not, there seems to be a Malta pavilion as well.
The planned desecration of the offical grave of the heroic dead of the Great siege in the courtyard over-looking Mechants street as proposed by the St John’s foundation will no doubt be music in the ears for Turks residing in Malta.

[Moderator – Ho-hum. We’re still discussing a 500-year-old feud. And I thought Eastenders was bad.]

Maybe the Turks still have it in for us because of the Great Siege?

A friend of mine who worked with the Turkish bank in Valletta told me that her Turkish colleagues denied this defeat…Ironical really since their Bank overlooks the Grand Harbour…